A blog devoted to the actors and public policy issues involved in the 1998 District of Columbia Court of Appeals decision in Freedman v. D.C. Department of Human Rights, an employment discrimination case.

Monday, April 19, 2010

White House Job Inquiry -- 1998

Charles F.C. Ruff, Esq.
Counsel to the President
The White House
Washington, DC 20006

RE: Employment Opportunities - Office of White House Counsel

Dear Mr. Ruff:

Enclosed is a copy of a letter dated February 6, 1998 that I wrote and forwarded to the Office of U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia (Robert Chapman, Esq.). This document submission is tendered further to my employment application, dated August 27, 1997, that I addressed to former White House Counsel Lanny J. Davis, Esq. in regard to my employment by the White House Counsel's Office, which, presumably, is still pending.

The letter to the Office of U.S. Attorney discusses a conflict between statements that I made in a declaration to the U.S. Attorney in April 1995 and subsequent representations made by the District of Columbia Office of Corporation Counsel to the District of Columbia Court of Appeals that my coworkers at the law firm of Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld had genuine fears that I might have been armed and dangerous: fears that were necessarily elicited by (unspecified) statements that I made or conduct that I engaged in during my tenure at that firm. The said conflict gives rise to the appearance that the exculpatory statements contained in my declaration to the U.S. Attorney were unreliable, knowingly false, or perjured. 1/

I sincerely hope that the representations by the Office of Corporation Counsel to the Court of Appeals that give rise to the appearance that I might have committed perjury; representations by the Office of Corporation Counsel that my coworkers had genuine fears that I might have been armed, dangerous, and possibly homicidal; and legally-unsupported and capricious speculation by the District of Columbia Department of Human Rights that I might have filed an inauthentic (i.e., forged or fabricated) document with a government agency in order to deny forensic psychiatric evidence that I suffered from a psychiatric symptom associated with a risk of violence will in no way impair my chances for employment as an attorney at the White House.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

Gary Freedman

__________________________
1/ At the time I made the declaration to the U.S. Attorney in April 1995 I suffered from one or more of the following disabling psychotic mental disorders (according to the George Washington University Medical Center Department of Psychiatry): bi-polar disorder (with mood congruent psychotic features), paranoid schizophrenia, delusional (paranoid) disorder, and possibly schizoaffective disorder. There may be a question as to whether I possessed the requisite mental capacity to make a legally-effective declaration in April 1995.